1. Field of the Invention
This invention pertains generally to effectively providing advertising content with respect to a prospective consumer's desires and, more particularly, to an integrated system and method for directing hyper-relevant content to consumers through the use of wireless technologies for the exchange of information, including the compensation of users for providing or viewing content.
2. Description of Related Art
In the ad business, there are a handful of yet to be realized holy grails. They are: (1) Deliver your ad to the correct demographic (age, gender, income level, etc.); (2) Deliver it at a time its recipient is sure to see it (not when he's out for a soda or in the bathroom); (3) Pitch your ad to consumers who are truly interested in what you are selling (instead of wasting advertising dollars on those who are not); (4) Catch consumers when they're relaxed and open to suggestion (instead of preoccupied with other things); (5) Reach audiences TV can't reach and do it with more targeted spots in a single day than they'd catch on regular TV; (6) Connect with buyers at the right time (i.e.: sell them food at meal times); (7) Get your message to consumers when they are at an opportune location (for example, promote a great restaurant at meal time a couple of blocks from the place); (8) Put ads into the distribution pipeline in just seconds using the Internet; (9) Base billings on the actual content delivered and do it all electronically and automatically; (10) Give advertisers proof their ads actually ran and track them on a minute to minute basis; (11) Provide feedback to the agency or its clients on consumer engagement; (12) When your ad shows, let viewers buy (or at least get more information) at the push of a button. Unlike any existing commercial advertising system, the present invention delivers all of these objectives, and more, by creating a totally new kind of mobile communications platform and forum.
Advertising.
Madison Avenue is working to outdated media models and needs to figure out emerging media fast or it stands to lose billions of dollars to others who will. Over the next decade, major money will be set in motion to create entirely new ad platforms and new ways to reach consumers in what today is a $250 billion industry. In the process, the ways and means of the contemporary ad business are going to be turned inside out, not so much because of the present invention, but because of the many emerging technologies that make it possible. For years, marketers have taken their best shots at consumers. Much of it is creative guesswork which follows available technology and distribution streams that were invented for other purposes. Television, for example, developed as a communications resource and quickly evolved into a form of free entertainment where marketers could insert the products and services others wished to sell into the paths of consumers while they were having a good time. It was not important if those people were really interested in the products and services; TV was simply the best way to expose products and services to consumers because TV had traffic. However, ad executives are beginning to recognize how much money is being wasted on antiquated media plans. For the first time in history, TV Spot ads were the biggest loser in ad spending for 2005, sinking 9.5% to $15.5 billion, because viewers have ‘left the building.’ Yet, newspapers, magazines, cable, and syndication all showed gains, with the category of outdoor advertising rising by 9.8% to $3.5 billion.
While consumers are looking for new things to do and new ways to entertain themselves, marketers are looking for audiences. However, audiences today are increasingly sophisticated about avoiding advertising messages. What is needed isn't just any audience, but an audience that truly cares about what advertisers have to say and sell, and those ad messages have to be bright, quick, and relevant to the new audience's current interests and lifestyle. Today, the gold rush is toward the Internet and to what has been termed the “3rd screen,” those tiny carry-around displays found on cell phones, iPods, and PDAs. Once again, marketers want to insert themselves (and their content) into our everyday business and fun. It is estimated that as much as 25% to 30% of the $100 billion spent each year on brand advertising will soon find its way to such mobile screens, but will users who pay for such services accept advertising? To borrow a statement from a highly-placed marketing industry executive: “If I'm a 22-year old male and I've downloaded four 3D games to my phone in the last 30 days, chances are pretty good I'd be interested in seeing a Sony PS3 commercial on my device.” He may be right. Recent studies have determined that kids like watching ads as long as they represent something they're interested in. Look at the Super Bowl, where large numbers of viewers tune in primarily to watch the ads. Consumers like these want to participate, want more to talk about, and want ultimately to have a say, so they can certainly take the time to tell advertisers about the kinds of content they would like to see. Yet, today's marketers have failed to recognize that there are technologies emerging today that can open dialogs between consumers and creatives and still leave the field open for expression and execution by the professionals in it.
New canvases are needed along with the audiences to go with them, but to secure them will require more than repurposed TV spots for tiny screens on the go. What is required is a systemic rebirth of the ad game including novel applications and pragmatic distribution. But more than anything, it requires marketers to get more in touch with consumers who are more in touch with themselves, with consumers who are articulate enough to tell us at least two things: 1) who they are, and 2) what they want. Technology can enable this, but there needs to be an economic reason for consumers to opt into the game. The present invention has been conceived to provide just that.
Visual Congestion
American cities are converging on BladeRunner-like visual clutter, and few regulatory brakes have been applied to this accelerating buildup. Electronic displays on taxi tops vie with sign-wrapped busses and trailers, bus shelters plastered with ads, lighted store signs, and a profusion of billboards, many with revolving panels and flashing lights, and now many with radio-enabled audio. The situation promises to worsen. Nanoscale components promise larger, cheaper, high-resolution video screens that are bound to find their way into signs, surfaces, and products of all kinds. We are already inundated with visual ads: our daily sensory diet includes thousands of commercial impressions, from pop-ups and animations in Web content to TV's full arsenal of 30-second spots, now with product placements embedded in what remains of the entertainment. With increasingly new technologies and eye-catching designs competing for drivers' attention, regulatory agencies, traffic engineers, and advocates are beginning to question which of these potential distractions may also pose a risk to driving. To what extent can commercial signage be blamed for accidents? What do we know about the nature of attention and distraction? Can this proliferation be rationally controlled?
Surveys show that signs and billboards indeed compromise traffic safety, especially at intersections and on curves. Flashing lights, motion, visual clutter, and novelty (e.g., the Times Square/Las Vegas Strip effect that is replicating so quickly in major cities) are implicated as part of the problem. Additionally, research on driver distractions confirms that visual complexity compromises safety by forcing drivers to scan the environment longer for street signs, turns, or critical landmarks. Researchers using eye-tracking devices to monitor drivers in traffic are finding that video signs are more distracting than static signs and can act as catalysts, increasing ad gazing of all types, even in unsafe situations. Similar studies are documenting the effects of visual distractions on both young and old drivers to determine what constitutes safe, manageable amounts of information, and the effects of animation, video, and moving panels on drivers, in efforts to set standards so that electronic signs and billboards are legible and non-distracting. To be non-distracting, however, is to contradict the entire purpose of outdoor advertising, and therein lies the problem.
It is undisputed that people are easily distracted. Theories of attention point out relationships between mental excitation/interest and the ability to perform tasks. We function best somewhere between boredom and over-stimulation. What researchers have found is that new or unexpected stimuli trigger involuntary responses and the more bored or unfocused we are, the more susceptible we are to these surprises. Studies have also identified modes of visual perception: a focal, or search, mode that is narrow and specific, and an ambient mode that is a sort of default, which is not focused on anything in particular, but having better peripheral awareness. We've learned that computer users performing search tasks in the center of the screen are slowed when objects appear on the perimeter, even when they aren't consciously aware of them. The more peripheral objects, the greater the distraction. Thus, the more we direct our attention towards that periphery, the less we focus on what's in the middle of our screens, or in the middle of our roads. Researchers have also found that new, moving and looming objects command attention; that the onset of motion triggers overriding or urgent attention, possibly tapping the survival instinct; and that changes in color can capture attention. None of this proves that outdoor ads cause accidents, but behavioral mechanisms clearly come into play when drivers encounter roadside signage. The notion that content is a major factor in drawing attention is starting to be examined. Because content and distractions are inevitable, a solution may lie in controlling them and in determining exactly how, when and where they should occur. That's a tall order, but it is also a primary objective of the present invention.
Physical Congestion
Just as advertising seems to clutter our landscape, so do moving objects. Traffic congestion in our major cities has reached epidemic proportions, prompting nationwide studies to get a handle on the problem. In places like Los Angeles, where, in the late fifties, one could drive anywhere to its outskirts in 20 minutes, it now takes hours, regardless of the time of day. According to the 2005 Urban Mobility Study Report, released in May by the Texas Transportation Institute of Texas A&M University, sixty-seven percent of the peak period travel was congested in 2003, compared to only 32 percent in 1982; fifty-nine percent of the major road system was congested in 2003 compared to 34 percent in 1982. The number of hours of the day when congestion is encountered has grown from about 4.5 hours in 1982 to more than 7.1 hours today. Traffic congestion is worse in the large urban areas than in the smaller ones, but even the smaller areas are unable to keep pace with rising demand. According to the study, 10 years is not an unrealistic timeframe to go from an idea to a completed project or to an accepted program due to the significant planning and development required. But in ten years at current growth rates, the urban area average congestion values will jump to the next highest classification—i.e.: medium areas in 2013 will have the congestion problems large areas had in 2003.
What does this mean in cost to consumers? In 2003, congestion (based on wasted time and fuel) cost drivers about $63.1 billion in the 85 urban areas studied. The average cost per traveler in those 85 urban areas was $794. Costs ranged from $1,038 per traveler in “very large” urban areas down to $222 per traveler in the “small” areas—and all this with fuel costing far less than it does today. Of the 85 urban areas studied, 2.3 billion gallons of fuel were wasted, an amount that would fill 46 supertankers or 230,000 gasoline tank trucks. In urban areas with populations greater than 3 million, 1.5 billion gallons of fuel (more than two-thirds of the total!) was wasted. At $2.00 per gallon, that's $3 billion tossed out by drivers in stop and go traffic. During that same period the Outdoor Advertising Association of America (OAAA) reports advertisers spent $5.5 billion on out-of-home advertising. If outdoor advertisers had instead placed that $5.5 billion in ads using the present invention, they'd not only have put their money into a superior ad platform, they'd have been able to reimburse drivers for their wasted $3 billion and still have $2.5 billion left over to spend elsewhere.
Plenty of studies have been launched to figure out what to do about our worsening traffic, but few concrete proposals have surfaced. Certainly, no proposals have emerged suggesting that we compensate drivers for their daily delays. Just the same, until we have a meaningful cure for congestion, the present invention can, to a degree, offset owners for their wasted time and money while they experience it.
Moving Objects
For as long as there have been moving objects, people have advertised on them. From early buckboards and stagecoaches to modern trains, subways, busses and aircraft, moving objects are the basis for corporate and self promotion, personal expression, identification and advertising. Today, it is not unusual to see cars, trucks, entire busses, even independently-towed trailers adorned with wraps or ads for products and services—many of these are backlighted to draw the attention of drivers and pedestrians while they parade down city streets nationwide. One of the world's largest advertisers, ClearChannel Outdoor, markets a variety of Taxi Tops for use in city traffic atop cabs. These come in various sizes and in two, three or four sided models which are typically backlighted to display graphics at eye level to passing sidewalk or pedestrian foot traffic. Some of these have lenticular screens to create movement, built-in LED readout pads, or larger LED panels to produce scrolling text, or more elaborate displays with flash type animation. The latter can be optionally linked to an onboard GPS system so it can be programmed to show only on specific streets or in special areas of the city. On these displays, ClearChannel's clients control the content, not in real time, but well in advance of street exposure. ClearChannel also offers a 14″×36″ flat, bolt-on trunk mounted sign which is positioned more or less at eye level to following motorists. ClearChannel's Taxi Media division refers to these as advertising “tonnage” since the car behind will view the same static, print ad for 5 to 20 minutes (the time a vehicle spends behind it in traffic in such places as New York City).
Another company, MotionLED, sells a long, slim LED panel which can be attached with suction cups to the interior of a vehicle's windows where it can scroll text messages horizontally, similar to those present in retail stores. These units are available in four lengths, from 8 to 40 inches, and in a choice of lettering in one of three colors. All of these are piecemeal efforts toward the presentation of advertising messages in public spaces and represent little more than a “shotgun” approach to demographic targeting. Advertisers using these techniques can only hope they will get exposure in the right part of town or at the right time of day and to people who may be inclined towards their product.
Distribution
Madison Avenue is working aggressively to convert its costly, labor-intensive and still largely paper-based process of buying and billing media. Even the Internet has yet to develop the crucial rules of business or programming schemas for buying and selling online that Madison Avenue truly needs. A recently released status report compiled by the American Association of Advertising Agencies (AAAA) shows that the Internet has achieved only one out of nine essential steps for conducting all electronic advertising, giving it the worst “discrepancy” rates (the percentage of advertising buys that don't run as originally ordered) of any major medium. That puts the Internet on par with out-of-home, radio, and network TV as the least progressive electronic business trading partners. Even the most analog of all media—magazines and newspapers—have made greater electronic business strides than the Internet and are today capable of at least taking orders electronically. The advertising community needs to engage in a massive combined effort before it can claim independence from the labor-intensive manual steps of paper processing and human input which drives up the cost of media buys and produces accounting inaccuracies. The present invention represents not merely an ad platform to deliver hyper-relevant content, but is one which is totally electronic from the ground up, integrating creativity, distribution, tracking, measurement, engagement, accountability and compensation into a single, verifiable, automated closed-loop network. As comprehensive and seamless a system has been previously unheard of in the world of contemporary advertising.
Television
Advertisers place ads everywhere from skywriting to urinals and from grocery store check-out dividers to the fruits and veggies themselves. However, it has always been the full motion video display that delivers the goods. Advancements in flat screen technology have allowed displays to creep into elevators, gas pumps and restrooms—wherever someone with a need to pause for a few seconds is present. Just as relentlessly, marketers are pursuing consumers who are on the move. With nearly 200 million U.S. subscribers to wireless services, marketers are wondering if ads beamed to wireless devices such as cell phones, Blackberries and hybrid devices will evolve into a viable media platform without upsetting their users. Some have referred to GPS cell phones as “the silver bullet” since they promise to let marketers send retail pitches to mobile users who might be in the vicinity of their stores. Chrysler Corporation is launching its own Mobile Phone TV Channel called “The Jeep Channel” which will actually run TV style commercials on cell phones.
From tiny screens to huge ones: ClearChannel's Outdoor Division and Digital Advertising Network, a Montreal provider of digital screen networks, have teamed to place hundreds of 4×16 foot video displays in shopping mall food courts across the country. Among other things, these will show the same kinds of 30-second TV spots you can see in your living room. And despite declines in viewership due to ad-skipping Digital Video Recorders (DVRs) and media alternatives such as the Internet, American viewers still spend between four and eight hours per day, per person, glued to their TVs—more than any other nation—but with Japan a close second. If these hours are spent watching commercial television, it's a fair guess they're watching about 15 minutes of commercials as well. Look again at the 2005 Urban Mobility Study Report. In the “very large” areas studied, there were 61 hours of delay per traveler per year, which is 219,600 seconds a year. In television ad terms that's nearly thirty 30-second commercial spots per day, and nearly sixty 15-second commercial spots each day. In Los Angeles, the numbers are even better. Angelinos experience 93 hours of delay per traveler per year or 334,800 seconds a year, That equals 44.64 30-second TV spots per average day, or nearly 90 15-second spots per day.
Measurement
Getting a handle on who's watching what in terms of advertising is critical to proving the worth of a media platform. This need for proof has spawned a variety of devices, programs and companies—some are now household words—whose job it is to measure the existing ad viewer base. ClearChannel is evaluating Requests for Proposals (RFPS) looking for new electronic devices to measure its huge radio audiences. Arbitron, a firm specializing in ad measurement, has developed a device called a portable people meter (PPM), a passive electronic device intended to replace the old-fashioned paper diary methods of documentation. Nielsen Media Research, meanwhile, plans a “portfolio” strategy toward adopting devices to improve the accuracy of its TV ratings services, which today also measure the time-shifted viewing of DVRs, video-on-demand and other competing platforms such as the Internet and mobile media. In December 2005, Nielsen Outdoor delivered its first wave of out-of-home demographic data to reveal the most likely people to see advertising on billboards. Nielsen convinced respondents to wear GPS-equipped pager size devices called Npods, then combined their respondents' traffic patterns with a map of outdoor advertising sites to determine who passes what kinds of outdoor ads, and when. Nielsen's data does not provide demographics on a per user basis for individual outdoor sites; it only gives advertisers a sense of what consumers could have been exposed to and roughly how often. The methods for gathering and applying ad measurements are woefully lacking in an industry that, in other respects, is mature and widespread.
Fundamental to ad measurement is defining what constitutes an “impression” or a “view.” Special software has been created to measure billboard views. Systems for television identify the number of household impressions, the time of day video-on-demand (VOD) programs are viewed and the demographics down to a ZIP code. But like the online industry, the VOD industry is still trying to figure out an “impression.” Cable operators count them as any on-demand program that's been downloaded for which playback has been initiated. Advertisers are more interested in knowing how many people watched the entire stream to be sure they saw the ad. There is often discrepancy even within the same company as to what the guideline should be. Some Internet folks say an ad can't be counted until the user's browser sends a message requesting it, while others won't count it as an impression until the full ad loads and appears on the screen. The cable guys count VOD views from the moment a program is ordered from a customer's set-top box, but if ad-supported VOD is to become more prevalent, the definition needs to include whether or not viewers started watching, and if they did, for how long? Still other companies are deploying electronic verification technologies to prove ads really ran on the schedules ordered and that their clients got what they paid for. Confusing? Yes.
The present invention does not have these problems. First, the present invention is not inserting commercials into an entertainment stream, it is showing ads exclusively. Secondly, since every showing is essentially “requested” by an electronic device on one moving object or another, all such requests and completed deliveries are confirmed as they occur and are logged for later downloading. Such integral measurements reveal what content was viewed, precisely where it was viewed (based on GPS data), when and by whom it was viewed (in significant demographic detail), and for exactly how long. The system also documents whether or not any impulse information was requested or if any purchases were made as a result of the viewing. Finally, the system can the track geographic movements on the part of moving objects after content viewings to confirm local area effectiveness—for example driving to a specific hotel or restaurant immediately after seeing an ad for it. Furthermore, every content request—whether or not it resulted in a confirmed delivery—is recorded on the hard drive of every involved moving object. This means that a detailed 24-hour map—a “data snapshot,” if you will—can be reconstructed to tell marketers where consumers went, when they went, who may have been with them at the time, what they were looking for as they did and whether or not in some cases they found it. To the best knowledge of the Applicant, to date, no other organization, system, means or technology has conceived or proposed offering such an exacting and automated capacity to deliver, measure, collect, process, assess, re-create, distribute, confirm, and then measure again the absolute effectiveness of conventional or hyper-relevant advertising and other types of consumer content on such a widespread scale and, in addition, to reward the average consumer for so doing.
Targeting
Geo-destination targeting is a process of combining IP-based targeting—a very common technique that allows advertisers to target ads based on the location of a user—with, for example, information about the city a user is searching for. For example, if a user in San Francisco is searching for an address in Austin, Tex., online marketers can target airline ads advertising cheap fares from San Francisco to Austin.
In the same way, the present invention can poll information from a moving object. For example, by using its onboard GPS Navigation system with its selected destination and route and then coupling that information with an owner's stored profile, a wide variety of highly directed ads can immediately be triggered for presentation on any of the moving objects it might encounter en route: retail stores of high interest, restaurants with favorite foods, hotels, trip stops or other points of interest that are known to meet his or his family's preprogrammed interests. Additionally, if onboard data indicates a history in searching out or purchasing certain kinds of items, such as men's leather boots, for example, and the traveler is passing through a town where there is a manufacturer specializing in fine leather boots, the present invention can “borrow” the displays of surrounding objects as the traveler nears town or passes through it, and call that fact to his attention. The providers of those borrowed displays will be compensated in kind for their use.
Behavioral Targeting
Behaviorally-targeted advertising is a way for marketers to get better aquatinted with their buyers. The Internet allows researchers to track buyers after the fact, to measure the things they look at, browse through or order. When they go back for more they can be “retargeted” with relevant advertising, relevant because they've already expressed significant interest in it, or perhaps in something related to it. Retargeting is used to cross-sell customers who previously bought something, or to contact prospects again in an attempt to lead them to a conversion event, such as a sale, a download or a newsletter signup. This works better with some groups than with others but it's another way for potential buyers to tell potential sellers who they are and what they want through their actions. Why not take this idea to the next level—as with the present invention—where buyers and sellers actually cooperate in such an exchange and where each side benefits greatly from the effort?
Buzz Targeting
Nielsen BuzzMetrics, a company which specializes in the measurement of consumer-generated media and word of mouth, claims, “In a world where word of mouth is on steroids, marketers need to focus just as much on the negative buzz as on the positive,” then goes on to characterize most advertisers as “ill-equipped” to respond to the quick-acting blogospheres so famous for churning out bad news at prodigious rates. The real ‘read-between-the-lines’ news here is that today's consumers are quite willing to speak out, and speak out loudly, about having better products and services. In other words, when it comes to understanding their customers, advertisers no longer have to be reactive, they can be proactive. They can ask. This is something marketers have not often bothered to do. Learning what buyers really want and really care about—what truly turns them on—and using that to mutual advantage is a critical part of the present invention.
Interactivity
Remember the last item on the list of advertising holy grails? Buy at the push of a button? XM Satellite Radio is preparing to ship portable MP3 players that will do just that, at least for music. A deal with Napster lets users push a button to “bookmark” songs they hear, and then the next time they dock their player with their computer it automatically buys those songs over the Internet. This is possibly the start of a trend. The present invention, however, goes a few steps further, thanks to a totally integrated advertising and distribution infrastructure. When users in moving objects in the field see an ad that intrigues them, they can push a button to get immediate information (such as pricing and availability), or they can request other things such as having a brochure sent to their computer. If they really like what they see and hear, however, they can buy the item on the spot. No need to dock with the Internet to complete a transaction, because credit and shipping have all been set up in advance, as will be explained later. You can even request a day or two to change your mind before the product ships. Imagine you're major film studio releasing a big movie for the weekend. You've budgeted a substantial ad spend to promote the grand opening with significant print and TV spots to generate excitement. How would you like to be able to deliver a mind-blowing 30-second trailer with surround sound to 100,000 teenage boys driving at 6:00 PM on a Friday night just as they're trying to figure out what they're doing that weekend? Then follow it up with a push button opportunity to have tickets waiting at a theater just minutes from their precise locations along with an electronic discount at a nearby Burger King? The present invention allows exactly such a promotion to be executed, both instantly and seamlessly.
The New Canvas
Computer and display technologies are considerably more advanced than the world of advertising which uses them. Liquid crystal displays (LCDs), Plasma and Digital Light Processing (DLP) have hit their stride and, although they are still expensive for many consumers, they are today produced in volume and their costs are falling. LCDs were invented around 1963 and were first intended as slimmed-down replacements for bulky CRTs or as screens for wall mounted TVs. Scaling up to large surfaces, unfortunately, was a problem. Instead, LCDs became the standard display for everything from watches to laptop computers and, as is commonly known, are rapidly replacing conventional lighting including brake lights and tail lamps on production automobiles.
A newer product, Organic Light Emitting Diodes (OLEDs), pioneered and patented by Kodak/Sanyo, now promise that original vision with higher levels of brightness and sharpness not possible with previous technologies. OLEDs are self-luminous but don't require the backlighting, diffusers or polarizers required by LCDs. OLEDs consist of two charged electrodes sandwiched on top of organic light emitting material, which eliminates the need for mercury lamps and yields a thinner, lighter display having very low power consumption. These displays are tough enough to use in portable devices and automobiles, can be viewed at angles up to 160 degrees and are able to produce clear, distinct images, even in bright light. OLEDs also produce high image resolutions, and because each pixel can be turned on or off independently, they can create multiple colors in a very fluid, smooth edged display. They are 20% to 50% cheaper than LCD processes yet utilize plastics that make them tougher and more rugged. Manufacturers claim processes that are akin to the “printing” of newspapers and anticipate panels that are bendable and potentially formable with no inherent barrier to large size glass and displays. In other words, these should be very cheap in the future.
Meanwhile, scientists at the Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Polymer Research (IAP) in Potsdam are making OLEDs transparent. While metal oxide coatings in earlier OLEDs made them opaque, researchers are investigating transparent physical properties. Such displays can be switched on and off to create graphics or video on demand, embedded in normal glazing. Because these new panels interfere little with visible light or views, their development is ideal for such applications as heads-up displays in car windshields or for the kinds of displays anticipated by the present invention. Of significance is that under the proposed business model, capital investment will become available to refine processes and develop the necessary production equipment for the earlier supply of OLED displays on a cost-effective basis, volume-matched to an established and mature transportation industry.
Government Agencies
It may be beyond the practical scope of this document to assess all of the potential areas of interface with respect to the U.S. government and the present invention. Although the U.S. government has many ongoing programs relating to moving object telecommunications, the applicant is unaware of any specific government prior art that would conflict with this invention. One envisions the government's role as essentially responsive and supportive towards the present invention by providing or assisting in the aspects of technical assessment, rulemaking, the creation of new standards and legislation. There are areas, however, where the U.S. government is independently or with private contractors exploring programs where the intent or results could overlap and lead to similar conclusions or cooperative implementations. Here are three such examples:
1) The U.S. Department of Transportation has launched its Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) program, designed to improve transportation safety and mobility and enhance productivity through the use of advanced communications technologies. ITS encompasses a broad range of wireless and wire line communications-based information and electronics technologies which, when integrated into the U.S. transportation infrastructure and into vehicles themselves, should relieve congestion, improve safety and enhance American productivity. One such ITS study involves the creation of a LIGHT VEHICLE FORWARD-LOOKING, REAR-END COLLISION WARNING SYSTEM for eventual integration into passenger cars worldwide. This study attempts to establish guidelines for the creation of a driver warning system which can prevent or reduce rear end collisions.
In some respects the proposed system is similar to the present invention in the sense that it proposes the use of a forward looking proximity sensing technology to read the speed of a vehicle in its forward path, calculate the range and closing speeds and then issue an ‘impact warning’ or a ‘following too close warning’ if conditions warrant, one that will be noninvasive to the driver of the following (host) vehicle. ITS properly assesses the available data on driver inattention (some of which was previously taught) but then fails to make recommendations consistent with its own and common findings. For example, Section 3.2.1, Background for the ITS guidelines, states: “The primary rear-end collision causal factor is driver inattention to the driving task (approximately 66% to 77%). Driver inattention in this context includes both inattention and distraction. Drivers are constantly scanning the roadway environment (i.e., looking down the road, left side, right side, scanning the mirrors and attending to internal and external stimuli). Drivers can only focus well on one thing at a time because the eyes focus together. So, for example, when drivers are attending to other stimuli they may not be able to adequately perceive the roadway in front of the vehicle. It is often necessary for drivers to take their eyes off the roadway and “attend” to other stimuli when operating in-vehicle controls and possibly carrying on conversations. Often drivers use multiple glances to attend to other stimuli thus taking their eyes off the roadway. These glances distract the driver and lead to inattention to the driving task. The glances may be momentary or of extended duration. Driver distraction accounts for approximately 11% to 24% of driver inattention. Drivers can also exhibit a behavior where they are focused on the roadway ahead but don't perceive the changes that are occurring. This “looked but didn't see” phenomenon is also indicative of driver inattention. This is similar to the previously discussed problems resulting from distractive advertising.
Unfortunately, ITS, in its recommendations, goes on to assume a very common solution found in various moving objects such as aircraft, trains or other types of machinery: that of installing a prominent visual warning indicator on the instrument panel of the vehicle, possibly augmented by an audio and a haptic (force feedback) warning, or a thumping on the throttle pedal. In other words, at a time when an inattentive driver is supposed to be re-engaging his thoughts and responding to an intense vehicular situation on the road ahead of him, his attention, based on ITS recommendations, is being diverted by yet more visual, audible and physical stimuli. As noted hereinabove, researchers have determined that new or unexpected stimuli trigger involuntary responses, and the more bored or unfocused we are, the more susceptible we are to these surprises. Also discussed above is the phenomenon of computer users performing search tasks, such that the more their attention is directed towards the periphery of their desired focus, the less they focus on the middle of their screens or the meaningful target. Imagine a warning light goes off on the on the instrument panel accompanied by an audible warning and a thumping on your right foot. Your natural impulse may be to look first at the light then possibly towards the floor until you collect your thoughts and by then, based on studies, the prospect of overreacting is high. All this when your attention should be outward on the car in front of you which represents an imminent collision. We've also learned that new, moving and looming objects command attention and that the onset of motion triggers overriding or urgent attention, possibly tapping the survival instinct, and also that changes in color can capture attention. But interpreting this as a potential solution is overlooked by ITS' engineers. We have a long and effective history of putting brake lights in prominent locations on vehicles that might stop quickly in front of us. It works. Perhaps a more natural and less distractive solution would be to utilize rear-facing video displays on the vehicles in front of us—as taught by the present invention—to provide color and graphic transitions for ‘following too close’ with more intense warnings or warnings with more impact (supported by the audible cues) upon more imminent potential collisions. Such a warning would audibly alert a driver to a situation which would be supported by directing his visual attention precisely where it should be to avoid an accident. This would be enabled by a similar proximity technology that ITS is proposing, then adding a returning wireless signal to the leading vehicle.
Upon full implementation, the present invention represents a more effective solution to the ITS proposed collision avoidance and ‘following too close’ visual warning since it provides a means to trigger and present attention-grabbing color and light changes prominently on the aft surfaces of moving objects which are in certain modes designed to capture the attention of the operators of following moving objects. It is the intent of the present invention to facilitate numerous such novel safety solutions and these are further explained in the subsequent text.
2) The U.S. Emergency Alert System (EAS) was designed by the Federal Communications Commission so that important emergency information could be sent quickly to targeted specific areas. EAS alerts not only broadcast media but also cable television, satellite, pagers and new forms of digital technology such as Direct Broadcast Satellite, High Definition Television, and Video Dial Tone. FCC rules have required broadcasters to monitor at least two independent sources for emergency information, ensuring that it is received and delivered to viewers and listeners in a timely manner. However, technology has moved on. Today, significant new methods are available to improve the capabilities of the present EAS. Satellites can be used to deliver EAS messages within seconds with high available levels of security without the geographical limitations of today's EAS. The Internet is a further impact-worthy technology since it offers redundant or back-up path communication with valuable follow-up capabilities. However, a private study on EAS effectiveness, completed in 2002, identifies three main concerns preventing EAS from becoming a truly effective system. One is that there is no concerted government or industry effort that combines EAS and other alerting techniques with existing and new technologies such as wired and wireless Internet, cell phones, PDAs and pagers to form a combined and seamless warning system. An FCC Report from the same period allocated increased numbers of EAS event and location codes so that local emergency managers and law enforcement officials could plan vastly improved local emergency public information warnings. Those new codes, according to the report, could lead to valuable information displays that are not currently connected to the EAS, such as changeable highway message signs. Every state, county, part of a county, and offshore (marine) area, has a specific number and hundreds of allocated numbers are unused. These could effectively identify unique areas or zones for hazardous weather conditions, nuclear power plants, military bases, neighborhoods or even groups of individuals such as police, firefighters, FEMA or other personnel, provided that the equipment is in place to facilitate those communications.
One aspect of the current invention is that any moving object so equipped becomes, in fact, a rolling billboard, well suited to delivering location-sensitive, real time information to other moving objects within the area. Weather information such as flash flood, tornado or hurricane warnings or on the spot highway information such as traffic conditions, detours, road-out, or turn-back situations.
3) In a similar effort, Motorola recently signed a contract with The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) for what Motorola calls a “Wireless Super Highway” program. The project represents an initial deployment of a wireless network aimed at supporting the previously mentioned U.S. Government Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII) initiative. Motorola and the State of Michigan are exploring ways to establish a roadside network that can reduce accidents and road congestion by wirelessly connecting vehicles to the roadside and to other vehicles. MDOT is helping to fund the deployment of Motorola's system in Southfield, Mich., as part of the State's ongoing investment in real-world testing of practical Vehicle Infrastructure Integration applications. MDOT is also supporting the research and development efforts of private sector firms as well as Original Equipment Manufacturers. Motorola's vision of wireless future roadways includes: vehicles that could detect potholes, ice-patches or other road hazards, then wirelessly transmit that information to other nearby vehicles so that they can avoid the hazard; and a panic brake alert application that can operate in foggy conditions and in which trailing vehicles could receive an in-vehicle alert recommending they brake immediately. Government and private industry projects like these could share, utilize and benefit from the present invention because its parallel development and mass-market deployment will be driven by private investment in commercial advertising and in the development of personal media platforms that promise new incomes to consumers or the equivalent of new production vehicles that are less costly to operate.
Integration
We see an advertising industry in relative disarray, desperate to develop new platforms in the aftermath of falling numbers for old media (like TV) while chasing after the new ones (cell phones and ipods) like gadget freaks at the local Best Buy. All the while the solution has been staring them in the face: capture consumers on their drives to and from work each day. This is perhaps the “4th screen”: a unique media platform totally dedicated to the display of ads. For a truly dedicated platform, however, integration must occur at a variety of levels:
1) Advertising. Advertisers can start by cleaning up their own act by a) electronically developing a new creative alliance with the public and by connecting their creatives and managers to that pipeline, and b) incorporating distribution, measurement, consumer feedback, tracking consumer engagement, content delivery accountability and compensation into a single automated system.
2) Manufacturing. As previously explained, the technology exists today to fully implement the present invention. Making it cost effective requires the acceleration and integration of manufacturing processes appropriate to the higher volume production of OLED displays to ensure even lower costs and permit mass-market installations on moving objects across the board, industry wide. Even here, proper integration must be thoughtful and paramount. In terms of traditional components, the present invention has the capacity either to replace or to incorporate into a single revenue-producing part for automated manufacture the following items from standard automotive production: tail lights, turn signals, brake lights, back up lights, license plate light and side marker lamps including their molded/metalized plastic housings, reflectors, lenses, bulbs (or LEDs), gaskets and connector seals (2 per side), center mount stop lights, vehicle brand and model logos or graphics with attach hardware; panel finishes with decorative trims including primers, surface preparation, finish painting, molding or plating; license plate recess structures and lamp mount assemblies, attach points and frames; and, finally, the independent stamping, painting and distribution of license plates and plate frames together with annual DMV registration sticker production, distribution and consumer attachment, together with all overhead, shipping, assembly and direct labor related thereto. How nice to be able replace all that with a single part that not only launches an industry, but puts money back into a new car owner's pockets in an age of skyrocketing fuel costs.
3) Government. As previously discussed, there are numerous programs where development of the present invention can enhance or enable better solutions to current government programs. Of greater importance is government participation on proposed standards, rulemaking, legislation and compliance. It is in the best interests of all concerned that the use of the present invention as a rich, mobile communications resource is exploited beyond mere marketing. It should be developed, from the outset, as a highway safety system in its own right by coordinating the interests of such government agencies as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and National Weather Service (NWS), and the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), as well as other international agencies and commissions. This ensures commerce and system compatibility across the board and across borders, in terms of highway signage, hazard and weather warnings, vehicle identification and signage, vehicle lighting and safety systems and public service announcement and alert networks such as the EAS, to name but a few. For the same reasons, the U.S. Armed Forces may need to be peripherally involved. The coordination of state and local agencies to incorporate standards for police, firefighters and similar first responders as part of a versatile and failsafe mobile communications system is just as important as the involvement of the Federal Government. A tall order, but considerably simpler than reaching the same levels of consensus and production readiness as were necessary in areas such as vehicle standards for crashworthiness, fuel economy and emissions.
4) Financial. The integration of financial interests is critical to getting a project of this magnitude launched. Commercial advertising is clearly the financial driver so it is reasonable to expect significant investment, directly or indirectly from the world of large corporate advertisers and their agencies along with companies having core stakes in communications, transportation or media. As is later explained, governments are likely to contribute to the development of segments they feel is in the best interest of the public or in areas that are in line with their agency's charter, programs or objectives. A third leg in investment may come from the individual motor companies, who will appreciate that the sale of moving objects which can also generate incomes for their owners (and is therefore tantamount a product having a lower cost of operations) is likely to gain favor with the consumer and that competition could quickly drive acceptance of products incorporating the present invention industry wide. A final leg of support will come from one or more of the major communications or outdoor advertising companies that will emerge as gatekeeper for this new platform. The real money will be in content Distribution and Compensation.
5) Compensation. The present invention introduces a novel and powerful means to reward the entire driving population, from the beginning student driver to daily commuters; from carpools to commercial fleet operators; and from the lowest income drivers to the wealthiest, delivering to all an ability to earn income as they sit in traffic, or alternatively, to lower their costs of transportation by allowing the use of their personal assets in a profitable public forum. In terms of market size for the present invention, the applicant envisions an orderly phase-in of video-equipped moving objects, with ultimate market penetration limited only by the total numbers of moving objects produced worldwide.
Compensation
There are certainly instances where the driving population has been enlisted to promote or advertise products and services using their personal vehicles for profit. These have been limited in scope and technology, are costly, relatively inconvenient and generally inconsistent with average consumer lifestyles. The method involves paying drivers to wrap their personal cars in ads touting products such as ice cream, juice bars or Internet services. The driver's job is simple: drive to and from work, pick up the kids, run errands—and be willing to operate as a traveling billboard. Some companies offer drivers the free use of a new ad-wrapped car, while other drivers are paid $300 to $400 a month to allow the wrapping on their own vehicles. Critics call it another example of creeping—and creepy—commercialism. As mentioned previously, taxi owners in some major cities are being allowed to place ads on the outside of their cabs. Leasing ad space in this way provides taxi owners and drivers with additional revenue which helps them offset the costs of adding wheelchair-accessible vehicles and similar mandated requirements. Cab owners and the drivers who lease them split revenues from the advertising, which has been estimated at around $400 per car per month.
As will be seen in a later description of the present invention, registered owners of appropriately equipped moving objects may be similarly compensated, but through a novel combination of private and public entities which control content and monitor compensation, operate automated accountability systems and integrate multiple media resources, financial partnerships and transportation support industries. Ironically, the huge revenues and personal incomes promised by the present invention are made possible by the very thing that causes millions of drivers each day to waste their precious time and money: traffic congestion.
Conclusion
Madison Avenue, up to now, has been reactive instead of proactive. It hires other entities to follow up after the fact to determine whether or not their content was actually delivered, and if it was, whether or not it went to the right parties. It has no effective procedures in place for judging ad “performance” (other than post analysis assumptions by creatives and the evaluation of sales) to determine what, if anything, the public thinks about the content they believe was delivered. Madison Avenue is about creative guesswork. It's about “following” media technologies rather than leading them. It would be extraordinarily advantageous for marketers to have a channel through which consumers could actively or even passively inform advertisers about the things they truly want to see and hear, for advertisers to fill those channels with content about products and services consumers really want and need, and to provide this content at a time and place of the consumer's choosing. For the first time in advertising history, the present invention enables a self-monitoring mobile network in which consumers can request specific content; view it, hear it, accept, reject or praise it; provide immediate and direct feedback on that content to the creatives and managers involved; and allow those creatives to modify and resubmit that content for distribution. Marketers are able to receive real time confirmation on that distribution along with priceless data on its engagement, effectiveness and acceptance, and the presenters of that content are financially rewarded on a per ad, per screen basis for the use of their platforms just as though they were partners in the same industry, which they are.
The applicant is unaware of the existence of any commercially-viable system capable of generating revenue for the general driving population through the display of targeted or hyper-relevant video advertising on moving objects which is governed and controlled by stored database profiles in other moving objects. Nor is the applicant aware of any single, closed-loop ad platform which allows consumers to request specific kinds of content, to distribute that content, to confirm delivery of that content, to measure its effectiveness, to account for and compensate such deliveries, and to create new content based upon direct consumer feedback and confirmed in-field performance. The present invention offers a unique opportunity to turn around the status quo in the world of advertising. It promises new channels of communication with consumers, new sources of public and private capital for investment plus significant ROI with shared revenue to the driving population. It further promises the alignment of multiple essential industries for the manufacture of unique video displays, the improvement of moving object safety and cost effectiveness, the environmental clean up of transportation corridors and the sharing of just compensation with the owners and operators of a new kind of mobile communications and advertising platform.